The present invention relates to a device for both holding a pressurized container, such as an aerosol spray can, and for actuating the valve of the container to dispense its pressurized contents. Specifically, the present invention relates to an improvement in the mechanism by means of which these devices are attachable to such containers.
Spray can holding and actuation devices are well known in the art, as exemplified by the following U.S. patents: U.S. Pat. No. 2,877,934—Wallace; U.S. Pat. No. 3,172,582—Belpedio; U.S. Pat. No. 3,189,232—Joffe, and U.S. Pat. No. 4,089,440—Lee. Further examples of such devices are disclosed in the following United Kingdom patent specifications: 1,163,978; 1,343,881; 1,487,719; 2,001,706 (published application); and 2,038,952 (published application).
One of the most popular types of spray can actuation devices has the general configuration of a pistol, as exemplified in the following U.S. patents: U.S. Pat. No. 4,432,474—Hutchinson et al.; U.S. Pat. No. 4,805,812—Brody; U.S. Pat. No. 5,086,954—Brody; U.S. Pat. No. 5,323,937—Brody; and U.S. Pat. No. 5,819,985—Brody. These devices typically include a body having a pistol grip handle, and means on the front of the body for removable attachment to the top of a spray can, the latter having a push-button spray valve. The body carries a valve actuation member that is operatively connected to a trigger, the latter being located with respect to the handle in a position analogous to that of a pistol trigger. The linkage between the trigger and the valve actuation member causes the actuation member to be brought into operable engagement with the valve when the trigger is squeezed, thereby actuating the valve to dispense the container's contents.
The devices disclosed in the above-referenced patents to Brody add to this structure a mechanism for disabling or locking the valve actuation mechanism. Further improvements, disclosed and claimed in U.S. Pat. Nos. 5,086,954; 5,323,937; and 5,819,985, relate to the structure of the device that provides for the attachment of the device to a spray can bey engagement with a rim or channel that typically surrounds the valve.
While many of the prior art devices, and particularly those disclosed in the aforementioned patents to Brody, have achieved commercial success, further improvements have been sought to increase the utility and improve the performance of the available spray can holding and actuation devices. Specifically, a mechanism has been sought for securing the device to a spray can that yields the advantages (e.g., excellent holding strength) that are obtained from the device of U.S. Pat. No. 5,819,985—Brody, but which can be manufactured more simply and economically. In addition, a mechanism of this nature should also, advantageously, be configured so as to offer a clear, unobstructed path for the spray emitted from the nozzle of the valve.
FIG. 1 illustrates one prior art approach to the problem of providing a secure attachment between a spray can holding and actuation device and the rim surrounding the spray can valve. This prior art spray can holding and actuation device 100 has a generally pistol-shaped body 102 with a downward and forward extending front portion 104 that is adapted for attachment to a typical spray can 106 having a push-button valve 108 surrounded by an annular rim 110. The front portion 104 of the device 100 is provided with a can retention member in the form of a split ring, comprising first and second ring halves 112a, 112b attached at the rear by a hinge (not shown). The free end of the first ring half 112a has a slot 116, and the free end of the second ring half 112b is provided with a finger or protuberance 118 that is received in the slot 116 to secure the ring halves 112a, 112b together when they are placed around the rim 110. To provide adequate stabilization of the can 106, the first ring half 112a is provided with a slotted tab 120 approximately 90° from end slot 116, and this slotted tab 120 receives a projection 122 that extends laterally from the front portion 104 of the body 102.
The above-described prior art device has proved somewhat complex and expensive to manufacture, and there remain some problems with the stability and security of the can attachment, especially with larger and heavier cans. This is due, at least in part, to the fact that while the ring halves 112a, 112b surround and engage the rim 110, they do not apply any significant inwardly-directed compressive force against the rim 110. Furthermore, some users find it cumbersome to line up the slotted tab 120 so that it receives the projection 122. Also, there may be a tendency of the protuberance 118 to break off in the attempt to insert it into the slot 116.
Thus, there is a need for a secure attachment mechanism for use with larger, heavier cans, and for an attachment mechanism that is easier to use and less prone to breakage. Furthermore, there is a need for an attachment mechanism that meets these criteria, while being simpler and more economical to manufacture than those that have heretofore been available. All of these criteria should advantageously be met with a mechanism that does not present any significant obstruction to the path of the spray emitted from the nozzle of the valve.